Tonight:
2°c
Fresh tensions over the Government's cuts programme surfaced today when Liberal Democrat Lynne Featherstone questioned its new welfare crackdown.
The Home Office minister hit out at plans for more frequent medical assessments for the 2.6 million people currently on incapacity benefit.
The Department for Work and Pensions wants to triple the number of weekly tests from 10,000 to 30,000 to identify those it believes are fit to work.
But Ms Featherstone said simply increasing medical tests may not be the right approach.
Writing on her blog, she said previous Labour attempts to “reassess” incapacity benefit claimants had been “variable at best”, adding: “We need to be sure that there is no perverse incentive to determine that someone can work when they cannot. We also need to be sure that those carrying out the assessment are good at it.”
Chancellor George Osborne made clear that the benefit, which costs around £12 billion a year, was now a target for cuts because its cost was greater than some entire government departments.
Writing for the Standard today before a speech in London, Mr Osborne said reform “cannot be ducked”. He believes frontline services can be spared if welfare bills can be lowered. Mr Osborne insisted that the coalition would protect the most vulnerable from the cuts.
Reader views (15)
I am utterly disgusted by some of the statements made on this thread. Sadly the ignorance they display is widespread. I absolutely commend Lynne Featherstone for her stance.
Such users are motivated by tabloid headlines and their own boneheaded ignorance. Lets get some things straight. Far from being a 'life of luxury', being a claimant is often a life of anxiety and being forced to attend the New Deal programme is often very soul-destroying, particularly with an unacceptable proportion of staff bullying claimants. Claimants do NOT get 'free money' Is being forced to attend an unpaid work placement from 9-5 'free'? I believe claimants are among the most demonised group of people in the UK today- if it isn't being branded as 'scroungers' then it is being branded as criminals- even though many claimants do voluntary work and have been entirely law-abiding and honest. There are claimants who are a lot more decent as people than certain self-righteous, wilfully ignorant workoholic extremists devoid of any understanding of the complex situation claimants are often in. Of course there are claimants involved in crime, dishonest claimants, claimants with no goals for themselves and fraudsters but the notion than this is restricted to the unemployed is baseless. There are plenty of examples of 'hardworking decent tax-payers' who have been involved in serious crime and have very unpleasant personalities. The extremists should attend a jobcentre before talking.
- Nathan Hazlett, Sunderland, 13/07/2010 02:51
Report abuse
Yes I agree the country does need to get a grip and make all the scroungers including alcoholics work for there luxuries including immigrants with loads of kids. On the other hand there are genuine disabled folk out there who are getting stressed about this which only makes there disablities worse. I for one have epilepsy and scoliosis making it extremely difficult to get and keep a job due to the stress and pressure which can bring on my epilepsy, that is involved in day to day employment. It also means I can never drive so have to rely on public transport. If all the immigrants were sent back to there homeland, less would enter once they realise Britain is not a 'Free country', there will be more jobs for our own (English/british) people who would love to work. It is easy for one to say if you cant find a job in your own area, move. Do they realise whats involved and how much it costs? It costs a lot to move and private landlords will not let propperty to anyone out of work making it even harder. To ressolve the housing benefit system, why cant somebody assess the prices for each propperty making private landlords charge a set rate in each borough for that size of propperty, so that the prices would not be so high espeically in London and tenants would not be asking for so much in housing benefit. Otherwise they will be so many of us homeless, me for one. We dont all have alternative accommodation and it is harder for those with young children. So think first.
- Louise, Croydon Surrey England, 28/06/2010 18:21
Report abuse
I am on DLA housing benefit and income support as I suffer with epilepsy and scoliosis, therefore it has been extremely difficult for me to pass an employers medical to get a job. If my houisng benefit is cut I will not be able to pay my rent so will end up homeless along with loads of others here in london. Some Landlords charge ridiculous prices as they know they can get away with it, couldn't that be assessed then the council will not have to pay out so much housing benefits to each individual. Unfortunately as some one has already commented on, it is extremely difficult to get accommodation when on benefits as landlords just dont want to know, I know from experience. Regarding the incomesupport/incapacity benefit, agree loads are fiddling and dont want to work as it is not worth it espiecally when one lives alone. But there are genuine ones like my self who are going to have to go through this medical and the stress related to it as well to allow the ones cheating the system to be found and taken off benefits. What about stopping paying alcoholics there allowance? Wouldn't this save some money as alcoholisim is not a disability, it can be put right if the person does the councilling etc. Some disabilities are not visual with the human eye. Also this crack down will send loads of immigrants back to their homeland giving more accommodation and jobs to the ones who belong here(british people). We may then get our (English/British) culture back.
- Louise, Croydon Surrey England, 28/06/2010 17:00
Report abuse
Lynne needs to get a reality check.
We are in a mess.
Welfare takes the most from our resources.
Lots of people are frauding and scamming the system.
Full benefit for those in genuine need, and reductions or loss for the scammers and scroungers.
Also we allow new immigrants access to benefits daily costing us so much.
Women who are only allowed to breed, and claim trapped by their husbands who allow them less rights than they are entitled too.
At last a government that does something about the vast abuse of the welfare system.
Well done.
Lynne Get a grip
- Patrick Mc Crossan, LONDON, 28/06/2010 16:08
Report abuse
Speaking as someone who has just recovered from 18.5 hours of surgery due to breast cancer and is currently in receipt of benefits I suggest you are "very careful what you wish for" Digby as this disease effects one in three people during their lifetime. You never know you might need them yourself one day.
Fiona Kirton - Somerset
- Fiona Kirton, Glastonbury United Kingdom, 28/06/2010 15:10
Report abuse
Osborne says cutting houseing benifits effects us all.When the hell was this rich spoilt brat ever on houesing benifits.I am not but know a number of woman with kids that depend on this benifit to keep a roof over their heads.I agree there must be better control,with no mansions costing 1 million plus being given to people,but this is a must benifit for many.The damage this plonker has already done with his stupid comments is huge.Estate agents already shy away from renting to those on houseing benifits,now they will run a mile.
- dave, london, 28/06/2010 14:59
Report abuse
part 1. second to last line, their should read THERE, it was niggling me the mistake and, only just remembered where it might have been. Bad habit to not check!
S.
- M, London, 28/06/2010 14:11
Report abuse
part 2.
Spending our taxes:
Some employers will need to be persuaded to the idea of taking on long term unemployed people with disabilities (and ones not with), they too have contributed to the extended time that these people who can, work, have not!
Everybody knows there are scams as well as many genuine claimants but, I think, that there are many who are more work available who, have not yet been given that clear support in getting there, to do that job! I'm sure the experts don't need me expanding, George too, you hope, from his earlier article!
Also understand the concern re. testing, like with George O., you never know when you are going to get the George, following his predecessors to the T on his politics (value still there on some things) or George, his own man! Sure it could? be fair!
Agree about being subtle on communicating in this area but the article earlier by G.O. was necessary, as it did, quite reasonably, say what the intention and hoped for outcome was, for reducing welfare here and also by someone directly responsible for deciding on these cuts
My comments, selective, as this is one area that goes on forever!
- M, London, 28/06/2010 14:02
Report abuse
part 1.
Spending our taxes:
I think good members of the public should have a decrease in taxes in the future (taxes which contribute to welfare budgets?) if they feel this strongly about not contributing. Maybe the pensioners who could not contribute well in taxes (NI) for their old age, because they worked in jobs (work which also keeps a country running) which sometimes do not allow for this. should have, thought better about their future burden on society a little harder (not my personal thinking) and, applied themselves a little harder in order to have secured themselves better paid jobs, then as a result become financially independent from the state. This is a way forward, isn't it? the not so happy about contributing at all folk, can then complain about the number of immigrants needed to support the lack of British people not available to work all of these jobs! You see they don't really need charity from the state, because it's not in most cases!
Also poor (not my word) people could stop having children altogether (although I do believe in limiting if not financially independent), thus making a few tax contributers happy, these folk can then think on future resources for these jobs (may be they can do a stint? ), immigration, leave school at 15 jobs, offenders. Not everyone will stay in a low paid, unable to contribute in taxes as much as the next man job forever, it will sometimes suit, as well as their being no choice, sometimes.
- M, London, 28/06/2010 13:43
Report abuse
UK population 60million. Adults possibly 40 million. 1 in 15 people physically incapable of work? I don't think so.
- jon, london, 28/06/2010 13:26
Report abuse
I'll believe it when I see it.
Last week we drove through a problem estate. The (so-called) women were out in force dressed in pyjamas and dressing gowns busily quaffing booze from cans and smoking fags as they lounged around on deckchairs in their litter-strewn front gardens.
I'll believe it when I see it ...
- Anglo, Sussex England, 28/06/2010 12:20
Report abuse
The government need to stop drip feeding these stories every day. Its just creating hysteria and stoking a back-lash. Do the analysis subtley then announce offcially otherwise you risk social unrest with constant news of welfare cuts and people feeling poorer before anything has actually changed!
- Paul, London, 28/06/2010 10:52
Report abuse
The government need to stop drip feeding these stories every day. Its just creating hysteria and stoking a back-lash. Do the analysis subtley then announce offcially otherwise you risk social unrest with constant news of welfare cuts and people feeling poorer before anything has actually changed!
- Paul, London, 28/06/2010 10:51
Report abuse
Don't be so daft Digby; what you are suggesting is both spiteful and mean for a civilised society. It is right to help those that need help and such a large proportion of the population have been let down by left wing politicians by keeping them dependent on the state, it is for the right to protect and inspire.
- Gary, Hong Kong, 28/06/2010 10:10
Report abuse
The time is ripe for ending the welfare state,all,and every benifit should stop with immediate effect,Parents,Disabled,Pensioners,unemployed,etc,have had it too good for too long, these hand out recipients have been spending our taxes for long enough.
- Digby Thornton Smith, Royal Berkshire, 28/06/2010 09:50
Report abuse
